Pro Tip: When signing a letter on co. letterhead but don't want to be associated w/ the statements, stand by the statements, or be liable to a 3rd party:
1-Do not print your name;
2-Do not legibly sign your name;
3-Write for ambiguity; and
4-Address to 1 person or no one.
1-Do not print your name;
2-Do not legibly sign your name;
3-Write for ambiguity; and
4-Address to 1 person or no one.
:2: As we can see in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, the Tether Bank letter is
(a) signed by an unknown individual;
(b) intentionally ambiguous in the second paragraph; and
(c) addressed to Tether only.
(a) signed by an unknown individual;
(b) intentionally ambiguous in the second paragraph; and
(c) addressed to Tether only.
:3: Interestingly, 99.99% of law firm opinion letters / statements are not signed by an individual and addressed to no one or just the client.
The letters are signed as follows:
Handwritten: "Law Firm Name"
Typed: "Law Firm Name"
The letters are signed as follows:
Handwritten: "Law Firm Name"
Typed: "Law Firm Name"
:4: Additionally, when a law firm letter's contents are opinion of law, the letter is addressed to client only or no one EVEN THOUGH the law firm knows the client will send the letter to a 3rd party to validate the company's business based on a likely aggressive legal opinion.
:5: An example situation of law firms addressing letter to client or no one and signing as the law firm only, are opinion letters provided to issuers of exempt securities sold publicly (e.g. municipal bond offerings)*.
:6: *Note: Investors in ICOs / STOs surprisingly have not requested securities opinion letters yet. This is pretty standard request in traditional finance but we all know most token investors don't come from traditional finance (read: none the wiser).
:7: I saw tons of similar legal opinion letters
(a) when I was an investment banker originating bond deals in the millions of $'s; and
(b) when I was being pitched by a potential customer prior to giving them banking services at my prior company.
(a) when I was an investment banker originating bond deals in the millions of $'s; and
(b) when I was being pitched by a potential customer prior to giving them banking services at my prior company.
:8: While the securities law opinion letters were never aggressive legal stances, the law firm knew the stakes were high so they drafted to mitigate potential suits from third parties.
The opinion letters in lieu of banking relations were definitely aggressive legal opinions.
The opinion letters in lieu of banking relations were definitely aggressive legal opinions.
:9: The Bank Letter to Tether is:
(a) Addressed to Tether to mitigate a third party's ability to sue the bank due to reliance on potentially inaccurate statements (read: no privity of contract + no duty).
(b) Signed by no individual
Handwritten: [not legible]
Typed: "Bank Name"
(a) Addressed to Tether to mitigate a third party's ability to sue the bank due to reliance on potentially inaccurate statements (read: no privity of contract + no duty).
(b) Signed by no individual
Handwritten: [not legible]
Typed: "Bank Name"
:10: The Bank Letter to Tether is (continued):
3 - Intentionally ambiguous in the second paragraph, "This letter is provided without any liability, however arising, on the part of [Bank]."
3 - Intentionally ambiguous in the second paragraph, "This letter is provided without any liability, however arising, on the part of [Bank]."
:11: The Bank Letter to Tether does NOT say anything relating to liabilities associated with the balance as incorrectly reported by @TheBlock__.
theblockcrypto.com/tiny/tether-an…
theblockcrypto.com/tiny/tether-an…
:12: Per The Block, ""The letter also discloses that the following balance is 'provided without any liability' and 'is solely based on the information currently in our possession.'"
This is incorrect reading of the letter.
This is incorrect reading of the letter.
:13: The Bank Letter to Tether actually says, "The LETTER is provided without any liability...on part of BANK..."
:14: The Bank Letter to Tether is designed to provide ambiguity to whether "liability" is modifying:
(a) the letter's statements (read: bank is not liable for the contents of the letter);
(b) Tethers balances (read: are their liabilities/claims against tether's balances); or
(a) the letter's statements (read: bank is not liable for the contents of the letter);
(b) Tethers balances (read: are their liabilities/claims against tether's balances); or
:15: The Bank Letter to Tether is designed to provide ambiguity to whether "liability" is modifying (continued):
(c) Bank related liabilities (read: did the bank only examine its claims against Tether or all third party claims against tether).
(c) Bank related liabilities (read: did the bank only examine its claims against Tether or all third party claims against tether).
:16: This string on the Bank Letter to Tether is not a comment on the validity of Tether ($USDT) and it's balances relative to the tokens issued.
:17: This string on the Bank Letter to Tether is:
(a) statement on writing letters that say one thing but people interpret as another (read: designed for ambiguity);
(b) a statement on not standing by your word (read: designed to mitigate personal liability); and
(a) statement on writing letters that say one thing but people interpret as another (read: designed for ambiguity);
(b) a statement on not standing by your word (read: designed to mitigate personal liability); and
:18: This string on the Bank Letter to Tether is (continued):
(c) a statement on writing letters to one party while knowing a 3rd party will see the letter (read: letters written to encourage third party reliance but mitigate risk of suit by 3rd party)
(c) a statement on writing letters to one party while knowing a 3rd party will see the letter (read: letters written to encourage third party reliance but mitigate risk of suit by 3rd party)
:19: That's it. The end.
Good lawyers draft for clarity.
Great lawyers know when to draft for ambiguity.
Remember that.
Good lawyers draft for clarity.
Great lawyers know when to draft for ambiguity.
Remember that.
PS - The last Tether balance attestation on June 1, 2018 from the law firm Freeh, Sporkin & Sullivan LLP meet all of these same rules for drafting for ambiguity and mitigating legal risk.
Addressed to no one. Signed by no one.
Addressed to no one. Signed by no one.
PPS - Other threads on Tether related attestations being drafted for ambiguity but designed to induce third party reliance.
God bless. I just realized I have a ton of content relating to Tether and related parties drafting for ambiguity and mitigating personal risk associated with an entities actions.
Note: Tether also does not disclose on their website any employees or executives. This is the same as a letter to induce action signed by no one addressed to no one.
@stephendpalley + @prestonjbyrne this one might amuse you.
More ambiguity for those counting.
The Bank Letter to Tether says "portfolio cash value is ____." It does not say USD in the bank. It says "USD cash value."
The Bank Letter to Tether says "portfolio cash value is ____." It does not say USD in the bank. It says "USD cash value."
Disclaimer: I am not your attorney and all of my tweets are not legal advice.
Related issue:
